• ! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !

    Discussions about police investigations

    In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.

    Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.

Non-Arsenal Transfers Thread: January 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.

M18CTID

Member
I wouldn't spend that kind of money on a player because someone is out for 8 weeks. I would've looked to see how Phil Foden or Brahim Diaz do before possibly settling on a cheaper option as cover, but since Sane's injury happened so late in the month they didn't really have that luxury.

I don't necessarily agree with it but I understand Guardiola's thinking, no matter what we may think of spending £60m on a squad player.

This isn’t a “justification” post, moreso one that is trying to explain the Mahrez interest as being something that isn’t as short term as simply going for him just because Sane is injured.

The way I see it is that he’s an alternative to Sanchez. As we all know, City were after another attacker by virtue of a long-term interest in Sanchez and we were all conditioned - both City and Arsenal fans alike - to thinking him signing for City was pretty much a formality until United came in for him. So it’s not unreasonable to think that the club switched targets to Mahrez. It’s rumoured that they made enquiries earlier in the window - possibly after Sanchez fell through but before Sane got injured - and perhaps Sane’s injury has impacted on the urgency to try and get the deal done this month but it won’t be the only reason.

Do we need him? In fairness, it’s not just opposition fans asking that question. 2 of my mates texted me yesterday and asked exactly that, and personally I see Laporte as being a more important signing. However, we do only have 2 genuine wingers in the squad - one of whom is injured for possibly the next 6 weeks - and we’re still in 4 competitions. The likes of Foden and Diaz aren’t genuine wingers and in any case I think Foden is still injured.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A_G

Highbury_2006

Village Idiot
This isn’t a “justification” post, moreso one that is trying to explain the Mahrez interest as being something that isn’t as short term as simply going for him just because Sane is injured.

The way I see it is that he’s an alternative to Sanchez. As we all know, City were after another attacker by virtue of a long-term interest in Sanchez and we were all conditioned - both City and Arsenal fans alike - to thinking him signing for City was pretty much a formality until United came in for him. So it’s not unreasonable to think that the club switched targets to Mahrez. It’s rumoured that they made enquiries earlier in the window - possibly after Sanchez fell through but before Sane got injured - and perhaps Sane’s injury has impacted on the urgency to try and get the deal done this month but it won’t be the only reason.

Do we need him? In fairness, it’s not just opposition fans asking that question. 2 of my mates texted me yesterday and asked exactly that, and personally I see Laporte as being a more important signing. However, we do only have 2 genuine wingers in the squad - one of whom is injured for possibly the next 6 weeks - and we’re still in 4 competitions. The likes of Foden and Diaz aren’t genuine wingers and in any case I think Foden is still injured.

This is the wrong day for you to glorify your soulless club in a Arsenal forum.
 

M18CTID

Member
This is the wrong day for you to glorify your soulless club in a Arsenal forum.

In mitigation, I’m posting in the non-Arsenal transfer thread where there is an active discussion about Mahrez possibly going to City. I’m not glorifying anything and other posters have concurred with some of my points. However, I do take your point about it being the wrong day and perhaps should’ve thought about that before posting.
 

Jae

Well-Known Member
We should be going for Mangala, He's been great for City this season when he's played. Won't cost much either, would certainly prefer him over Evans.
 

Sammy1887

New Year, Same Hate For Reed
We should be going for Mangala, He's been great for City this season when he's played. Won't cost much either, would certainly prefer him over Evans.

Pep and City are bitter after Sanchez deal went haywire. Cannot see them doing us any favors at this point.
 

field442

Hates Journalists Named James
Trusted ⭐
Yaya wouldn’t make any sense from a Leicester point of view though. That’s basically £65m with or without the player. Toure is worth **** all at this stage in his career. He’s ****ing 35 soon.
 

dashsnow17

Doesn’t Rate Any Of Our Attackers
Trusted ⭐
On a more general note, how on earth are clubs expected to prepare for and play a league game on deadline day? Leicester are in a position where they are receiving approaches for their best player at the same time as having to prepare to play Everton.

This season more than any has demonstrated the shift in power towards the TV companies, clubs are entirely at the mercy of TV scheduling. It can't be sustainable to have such little regard for the actual process of training and playing professional athletes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts+

Top Bottom